On Sun, 05 Jan 2014 11:50:36 +1100, Ben Finney wrote:
> On 31-Dec-2013, gregor herrmann wrote: > > Can't this be solved with a simple > > Provides: closure-compiler > > in the libclosure-compiler-java package? > > (Or the other way round.) > > That doesn't address: > > * a manpage for the command (required by Debian policy), which is > extraneous for a libary package That's not my interpretation of Debian Policy, or maybe I misunderstood you. 12.1. Each program, utility, and function should have an associated manual page included in the same package. It is suggested that all configuration files also have a manual page included as well. Manual pages for protocols and other auxiliary things are optional. I can't find any reference to "library packages" or similar. So if closure-compiler can be executed it needs a manpage, no matter in which (kind) package under which name it is. > > Having a de facto empty package doesn't seem very appealing to me. > No package providing a command should be empty; there needs to be the > command, and a manpage, at least. So this objection doesn't seem to apply > for bug#733996. My understanding of the idea [0] was that the new closure-compiler package would only contain a symlink (and a dependency), since that actual "command" is the same jar as what is in libclosure-compiler-java [1]. If that's the case, it still feels a bit odd to me. If I misunderstood the situation or there are other ideas on how to separate a binary and a library package, that's fine for me :) Cheers, gregor [0] http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=705565#100 [1] http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=705565#90 -- .''`. Homepage: http://info.comodo.priv.at/ - OpenPGP key 0xBB3A68018649AA06 : :' : Debian GNU/Linux user, admin, and developer - http://www.debian.org/ `. `' Member of VIBE!AT & SPI, fellow of the Free Software Foundation Europe `- NP: Dire Straits: Lions
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature